1. Questions in Pentagon presser today about the Oklahoma Guard. I think this is state of the law.
Title 32 establishes the National Guard.
32 USC § 110 Regulations, provides: The President shall prescribe regulations, and issue orders, necessary to organize, discipline, and
2. govern the National Guard."
32 USC 903 provides that the Secretary of Defense has the power to prescribe regulations related to the National Guards "homeland defense" activities.
3. 10 USC § 10105 provides that the Army National Guard is the reserve component of the Army.
10 U.S.C. § 12102(b) provides:
Except as otherwise provided by law, the Secretary concerned shall prescribe physical, mental, moral, professional, and age qualifications for the
4. enlistment of persons as Reserves of the armed forces under his jurisdiction.
So that nitwit brigadier will likely get a direct order from the Secretary of the Army telling him to shape up or he will face discipline for disobeying a direct order.
5. And for the Governor and State of Oklahoma:
32 U.S. Code § 108 - Forfeiture of Federal benefits. If, within a time fixed by the President, a State fails to comply with a requirement of this title, or a regulation prescribed under this title,
6. the National Guard of that State is barred, in whole or in part, as the President may prescribe, from receiving money or any other aid, benefit, or privilege authorized by law.
1. #KyleRittennhouse trial they are back. Prosecutor on No 5. Says detective Howard air dropped the videe to the prosecutor's phone and he emailed it to himself. Some how it was compressed with email and not compressed with air dropped. So that is why the metadata doesn't jive.
2. The jury is ready for the No. 4 video. Plug for VLC media player. They are sending it up to the jury. Judge coughed like he has TB. Says he has a cold not allergies. No the Defense counsel is trying to say they didn't have the "quality of evidence" the State has and will ask
3. for a mistrial. Sounds like they think they are going to get a guilty verdict. Judge says not going to address because the jury has not requested No. 5. The issue is the Defense got the compressed version and not the uncompressed version. Judge says it only has to be
1. Some snafu with the evidence in #KyleRittenhouse Trial. They are trying to respond to the jury request to view video. There is a problem about the video they have and the one actually admitted. The judge wants to reopen the evidence to allow the one they saw to be admitted.
2. It's the video of one of the shootings. The prosecutor has said they have no objection to the three videos that were on a drive that was admitted can be given to the jury. They are apparently in agreement. The prosecutor says give them the exhibits allow them to watch in the
3. courtroom by themselves. No attorneys and judge not present. The prosecutors said that they can use their tech related computer. Defense is asking if the defendant has a right to be present but the judge does not agree and says they look at evidence in the jury room without
2. First thought 18 USC § 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers. The key definition in this chapter is "protected computer" that includes a computer that "is part of a voting system . . . used for . . . a federal election. Up to ten years first offense.
3. How many computers were illegally accessed by the GQP stop the steal scam? I think we may see a lot of these warrants in the next few days. And the connection to Boebert may be the door into the @HouseGOP criminal organization that will allow serious felony charges against
1. I was fascinated by the @maddow block on the guilty plea in Las Vegas regarding the big voting fraud case that Paul Laxault Jr and Max Schlaff with others helped the party use to create voting restrictions. Turns out the fraud was committed by a Republican.
2. I looked up the case and would grateful if any NV attorneys could chime in on whether this docket shows that there was a grand jury, noted on the docket upper right as "Lower Court Case" with a separate case number.
3. Could this indicate that the plea agreement included cooperation? Might there be a larger ongoing grand jury that will look at people this individual conspired with or at least were aware of his culpability and then advanced his fraud to restrict voting rights?
1. Suppose there was a close election. Remember Bush v. Gore? Both sides went to court to win and one prevailed. Nobody really claimed any of that was an attempt to overthrow. It was a dispute over a close vote count. Some hardball tactics. But not really a crime.
2. The challenge I see in charging for what TFG and his crew attempted to do with the help of members of Congress is that, even a frivolous electoral vote challenge may not be unlawful. For me, the element that needs to be proven and connected to the conspirators is that they
3. agreed to commission of violent acts to effect their overthrow. I think that proof is likely in records that TFG is trying to block but I believe that the DOJ should have had access to those records since Jan 20 at noon. I believe that foreign intelligence services likely
1. I've never seen this account before today and suddenly a long thread hits my timeline because so many of my Twitter colleagues follow it. My quick analysis of this account tells me it's likely a CCP account. May be Russian but it's slick state level propaganda IMO.
2. First the hook. The thread goes to lengths to describe what a great hero of democracy Merrick Garland is and how we should block anyone who says otherwise. I must admit, the former DOJ attorneys who are posting about Garland often don't match my view but I still value their
3. thoughts but this Hong Kong based marketing guy says to block them. Then as the thread progresses the account claims to have been on team Garland for a long time citing investigations that happened before Garland was even chosen but a quick look at his timeline showed